Re: Generic helper I/O format

On 07/04/2012 10:00 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:

> The blob only exists in this discussion for two reasons; the old helpers
> backward compatibility requires it, and you wanted to discuss a "body"
> field for the responses. Even not understanding properly the specifics
> of why you wanted to discuss it I dont think its a good idea since we
> can key-pair and encode anything new.

But if blob is required for backward compatibility, why not use it for
new stuff as well, especially since it will reduce encoding overheads?
Seems like a good solution to me. And since specific helper replies can
tell the generic parser when to expect the blob, we do not have to argue
about the "BS" part; that part is not needed.

> If we can agree on making it key-pair across the board for all the
> details which might be passed back we can move on.

but we cannot use key-pair across the board because, as you said, "the
old helpers backward compatibility requires [the blob]".

I am OK with going key-pair across the board if no other helper (old or
new) is going to use blobs. Otherwise, the [new] helpers that can
benefit from blobs should be able to use them. Why waste a good feature
if it is required for other reasons anyway?

Thank you,

Alex.
Received on Thu Jul 05 2012 - 05:22:25 MDT